Chandigarh

StateCommission

A/25/2022

Reliance Trends, Reliance Retail Ltd. - Complainant(s)

Versus

Taranjit Singh Sethi - Opp.Party(s)

Sanjiv Pabbi Adv.

11 May 2022

ORDER

STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,

UNION TERRITORY, CHANDIGARH

 

Appeal No.	25 of 2022
Date of Institution	15.03.2022
Date of Decision	11.05.2022

Reliance Trends, Reliance Retail Ltd., Elante Mall, Plot No.178, Shop No.247 & 248, Industrial Area, Phase-I, Chandigarh through its Power of Attorney Holder Himanshu Shekhar Jha, aged 57 years, son of Late Sh. Dr. M.P. Jha.

                        …..Appellant/Opposite Party

Versus

Taranjit Singh Sethi (aged 35 years) son of Sh. Sawinder Singh Sethi, r/o Flat No.230, Advocate Society, Sector 49-A, Chandigarh

 

                  

BEFORE:  JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI, PRESIDENT

                 MRS. PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

                 MR. RAJESH K. ARYA, MEMBER

               

Argued by: Sh. Sanjeev Pabbi, Advocate for the appellant.

                       

PER PADMA PANDEY, MEMBER

              This appeal is directed against an order dated 01.02.2022, rendered by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum-II (now District Commission-II), U.T., Chandigarh (in the short ‘the District Commission’ only), vide which, it allowed the Consumer Complaint against Opposite Party, with the following directions: -

“In view of the above discussions, the consumer complaint deserves to succeed against the OP, and the same is accordingly allowed qua it. The OP is directed:-

1. to refund Rs.3/- i.e. cost of carry bag to the complainant.
2. to pay Rs.100/- to the complainant towards compensation for harassment and mental agony. Compensation imposed on lower side as mental agony of parting with the price of the carry bag could only be caused to this extent.
3. to pay Rs.1100/- as litigation expenses.      

10.      This order shall be complied with by the OP within one month from the date of receipt of its certified copy, failing which, it shall be liable to pay the amount at Sr.No.(i) to (iii) to the complainant along with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of the order, till its realization.

2. The facts, in brief, are that on 09.08.2019, the complainant purchased some goods worth Rs.2569.60 from the Opposite Party, including cost of the carry bag. It was stated that the cashier of the Opposite Party handed over the goods in a carry bag having the advertisement of the Opposite Party’s shop, though he had no intention to purchase the carry bag, whereas, it was the duty of the Opposite Party to provide the carry bag, but he was forced to pay the price of the carry bag worth Rs.3/-.  It was further stated that the complainant requested the Opposite Party to refund the price of the carry bag, but the Opposite Party completely refused to do so. It was further stated that the aforesaid act of the Opposite Party, amounted to deficiency, in rendering service, as also indulgence into unfair trade practice. When the grievance of the complainant, was not redressed, left with no alternative, a complaint, was filed.
3. The Opposite Party filed its reply and admitted the factual matrix of the case and stated that to protect the environment at large and also to provide convenience to the visiting customers, the Opposite Party had introduced the optional sale of carry bags and charges of Rs.3/- for a carry bag were taken only after the consent of the Complainant.  It was further stated that the requisite information was also displayed in the Store of the Opposite Party. It was further stated that there is no deficiency in service on its part, and the Opposite Party had prayed for dismissal of the complaint.
4. In the rejoinder, filed by the complainant, he reiterated all the averments of Opposite Party, contained in the complaint.
5. The parties led evidence, in support of their case.
6. After hearing the Counsel for the Parties, and, on going through the evidence, and record of the case, the District Commission, allowed the complaint against the Opposite Party, as stated above.
7. Feeling aggrieved, the instant appeal, has been filed by the Opposite Party.
8. We have heard the Counsel for the appellant and have gone through the evidence, and record of the case, carefully.
9. After giving our thoughtful consideration, to the contentions, advanced by the Counsel for the appellant, and the evidence, on record, we are of the considered opinion, that the appeal is liable to be dismissed at preliminary stage, for the reasons to be recorded hereinafter.
10. On going through the records we find that the learned District Commission has relied upon judgment dated 18.05.2020 passed by this State Commission in F.A. No.238 of 2019 titled as Big Bazaar (Future Retail Ltd.) Vs. Ashok Kumar which is squarely applicable to the facts and circumstances of the instant case. Further, it is held by the learned District Commission that there were definitely unfair trade practice and deficiency in service by not providing the carry bag to the customer, as it is being very odd and inconvenient for the customer to carry new articles in hand without a carry bag. The appellants are a profit making company, with several stores across the country. Inspite of this, the appellants force the gullible customer to pay additional charges of the carry bag, which is certainly an unfair trade practice. Accordingly, this Commission feels that the present appeal deserves to be dismissed.
11. For the reasons recorded above, the appeal, being devoid of merit, must fail, and the same is dismissed at preliminary stage, with no order as to costs. The order of the District Commission is upheld.
12. Consequently, Miscellaneous Application No.224 of 2022 for staying the operation of the impugned order dated 01.02.2022 also stands dismissed, having been rendered infructuous.
13. Certified copies of this order, be sent to the parties, free of charge.
14. The file be consigned to Record Room, after completion.

 

Pronounced.

11.05.2022

                                                                           Sd/-

                          [JUSTICE RAJ SHEKHAR ATTRI]

PRESIDENT

                                                                            

 

                                                                                        Sd/-

[PADMA PANDEY]

MEMBER

 

 

                                                                                           Sd/-

                                                                                   [RAJESH K. ARYA]

 MEMBER

GP